Privacy Policy

Month: November 2016

The war on fake news as conducted by the Washington Post has another left wing journalist crying foul. Last week, Glenn Greenwald former columnist for Salon and the Guardian, best know for his expose on U.S. surveillance based on information provided to him by Edward Snowden, trashed the Washington Post’s hit piece on “fake news” and 200 alternative media sites.

Mr Greenwald portrayed the Washington Post’s list of alternative media web sites as part of a Russian disinformation campaign as “disgraceful“, noting that the Washington Post did virtually no fact checking on the organization that prepared the list.

Matt Taibbi, of Rolling Stone Magazine also weighed in on the Washington Post’s “fake news” story. Mr. Taibbi, best know for his unflattering depiction of Goldman Sachs, was harsher than Mr. Greenwald. Mr. Taibbi called the Washington Post Story “shameful” and “disgusting“.

The Fake News War

Main stream media have picked a losing battle with alternative media in their fake war salvo. Citizen journalists and alternative “fake news” media sites vastly outnumber and outclass mainstream media forces in terms of output and readers, and in many cases, in producing quality journalism.

In addition to producing more content, the “deplorables” that create and read alternative media, out Periscope, out Youtube, out Twitter, out Facebook, out Meme mainstream media outlets, further amplifying their reach and influence.

Alternative media also has a signficant first mover advantage on Gab.ai, the new alternative to Twitter.

Mainstream media has picked a losing battle with the ‘deplorable’ alternative media by decrying “fake news” or “Russia propaganda” indiscriminately on sites that don’t tout the MSM narratives. If MSM wishes to win the media war and win back hearts, minds, viewers and readers, they need to engage in solid journalism with a focus on integrity and devotion to the truth, rather than to an obvious left-wing narrative.

By continuing their current path of name calling and inattention to the truth, the mainstream media is ensuring its own demise.

Fake news is nothing new. Ever since the printing press was invented, publishers have taken liberties with the truth. The recent outrage over fake news has come from the main stream media. The MSM contends that fake news is responsible for an unjust outcome in the presidential election that denied the ‘over qualified’ Hillary Clinton her rightful and pre-ordained ascension to the Presidency.

As such, the MSM insists “something must be done” and has enlisted Facebook and Google to help eradicate “fake news” by identifying it, demonetizing web sites that publish fake news and removing it from view.

Indeed, it’s not that there is more “fake news” today, it’s that fewer people are reading MSM’s versions of it. This has the MSM firing up its shrinking audience and crying “fake news!” and “Russian Propagana!” much in the same way they have been crying “racist!” and “sexist!” in an attempt to silence political opposition for well over a decade.

The latest MSM ploy has fallen on deaf ears and blind eyes. Many remember the MSM as cheerleaders for Hillary Clinton during the Presidential campaign of 2016 and examples of MSM complicity in fake news stories (Rathergate comes to mind).

What the MSM is really complaining about is declining relevance. To try and regain relevance they have resorted to smearing alternative media sites with a broad brush as they see them as a threat to their very existence.

The Hill, while largely defending it MSM brethren, notes that the REAL issue with fake news is “mainstream news with an agenda.”

Breaking ranks with other main stream media outlets, Fortune made an obvious observation: Not all fake news comes from Russia.

The main stream media has been blaming “fake news’ for tipping the election from Hillary Clinton to Donald Trump. The mountains of spurious news stories, the MSM insist, was part of a Russian directed propaganda effort to ‘install Trump in the White House“.

Many agree that fake news played a role in the election. Indeed, some Trump supporters believe that fake news pumped out incessantly by the main stream media in support of Hillary Clinton helped make the election much closer that it would otherwise have been.

Just as all Trump supporters are not racists and all anti-Clinton news is not “fake” or has Russia as its origins, perhaps one day the mainstream media will admit these obvious truths and even also recognize that not all news from Russian is fake. And that some fake news has its origins in the main stream media outlets in United States.

Paul Krugman, a Nobel Prize winner in economics and opinion writer for the New York Times, launched a twitter outburst against Donald Trump. Mr. Krugman used the Russian propaganda angle, stating that Russian President Vladimir Putin “installed” Donald Trump as President, with the aid of FBI director William Comey.

So Comey and Putin installed a crazy, vindictive can't-handle-the-truth person in the White House. Scary. pic.twitter.com/pr3WPT9HYH

Mr. Krugman has presented no evidence that Vladimir Putin “installed” Donald Trump as President of the United States. Once upon a time if the New York Times printed something, people would assume that while it may have contained bias, that factually it was correct.

Today, it seems bias matters more than facts at many main stream media outlets, which is not a good way of combating alternative media “fake news”.

It’s one thing to be told you are a hack, or purveyor of shoddy journalism or fake news, but quite another to be named as an alleged agent of a foreign power with intent to sabatoge U.S. elections.

Natural News, a news source on natural health, is demanding that the Washington Post retract and apologize for a story it published recently, that blamed Russian involvement in disrupting the US. Presidential election by spreading “fake news” while referencing a list of sites that assisted Russia in its effort.

Natural News was on that list.

The Intercept roundly criticized the Washington Post for not providing evidence that the compilers of the list (ProporNot) of alleged Russian co-conspirators were indeed “experts” in Russian Propaganda or indeed had any evidence of such collaboration of the websites on their blacklist.

Natural News also notes that the Washington Post ‘knowingly fabricated a blatantly false and defamatory story that accuses dozens of patriotic U.S. website publishers of being traitors to their own country.’ Natural news is not only demanding a retraction and an apology from the Washington Post, but is also inviting all media entities named by PropOrNot to join a defamation lawsuit.

From Russia, With Love

The main stream media seems to have shifted seamlessly from incessant accusations of racism, sexism, homophobic and other less than inclusive terms as a way of belittling those that disagree with their narrative to tagging political opponents as readers or purveyors of “fake news”, which in some cases they allege, comes from Russia.

Identity politics failed in the most recent Presidential election as it required too large of the segment of voters to be deemed deplorable and irredeemable to be a viable strategy. Indeed, many Trump supporters wore the “deplorable” tag with pride, further reducing the effectiveness of the attempt at name shaming.

The tagging of political opponents with the fake news/Russian influenced label by the main stream media ploy lays its hope on people’s sense of wanting the truth and not wanting to be associated with big bad Russia. The problem with this approach, however, is the main stream media itself has been caught in some major fake news whoopers. In addition, Russia is no longer the perceived mortal enemy of the United States as it was during the Cold War.

A better ploy might be to label opponents as taking their orders from ISIS, but then that would be Islamophobic.

The Washington Post recently published a hit piece on dozens of web sites as being “Russian Propaganda”. The Washington Post cited Russian propaganda “experts” Prop or Not as the source for a list of sites peddling not only fake news but propaganda from the Kremlin.

The Ron Paul Institute was one of the sites listed as peddling Russian misinformation. No specific reason was given for the inclusion of the RPI or any of the other sites on the Prop or Not list.

The Ron Paul Liberty Report published as response today. The RPLR noted the baseless generalized claims made by Prop or Not and endorsed by the Washington Post. The RPLR says this is not the first time the RPI has been under attack and expects such attacks to continue. The RPLR believes that the accusations of Russian influence are main stream media attempts to shift blame for Hillary Clinton’s loss in an electoral landslide to Donald Trump.

Wikileaks’ publication of John Podesta’s emails has revealed a series of unexplained coded language that researchers claim lead to a pedophile ring centered around a pizza restaurant in Washington D.C. The alleged scandal has been dubbed “Pizzagate”. John Podesta was Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager.

While the citizen researchers, who until a few days ago had been sharing their findings on a Reddit thread (since removed by Reddit), have not found a smoking gun, their research continues.

In a bizzare twist to the Pizzagate story, The New York Times and the Washington Post have dismissed the Pizzagate story. The New York Times last week called the Pizzagate research “a fake news onslaught“. Rather than an investigative piece, the New York Times piece focuses on the prevalence of “fake news” and the harm it causes. The New Yorks definitively states regarding the Pizzagate allegations: “none of it is true.”

The Washington Post ran a story “How Fake News Hurts Real People” The Washington Post story is similar to the NY Times story. Rather than concede that the Podesta emails contain some bizzare language, the Washintgon Post writes the allegations are ‘absurd on their face and detached from any gossamer thread of fact‘ and concludes that those impacted by Pizzagate allegations have claims for defamation.

Rather than reporting and coming up with their own scoops through investigative journalism, the main stream media appears to be relegated to the position of debunking “fake news” and giving legal advice.

The Washington Post article blaming “russian propaganda and fake news” for tipping the election to Trump has been taken to task by the Intercept.

In a co-authored article by Ben Norton and Glenn Greenwald, the Intercept calls out the Washington Post for promoting a list of web sites published by a web site called Prop or Not. The Intercept notes that no one at the newly formed Prop or Not site has been identified, yet the Washington Post referred to Prop or Not as “experts” without revealing any of their credentials.

The Prop or Not list of web sites that supposedly peddle “Russian Propaganda” strains credibility. Many of the sites on the Prop or Not appear to be right or left leaning sites or sites operated by former Reagan appointees (David Stockman and Dr. Paul Craig Roberts) that are critical of the current administration.

The For Prop or Not criticism of the administration easily translates to “Russian Propaganda”. The Intercept writes re Prop or Not:

“The Washington Post should be very proud: it staked a major part of its news story on the unverified, untestable assertions of this laughable organization.”